As a Gen Y, I think the ILX is pretty intriguing (and of course I'm talking about the K24 6MT version)... if it's priced right. It's sort of boring in the sense that it seems you can get most of what this car offers... in a nearly decade old 1st generation TSX.

The 2 litre engine though... yikes... but I don't think many millenials would be complaining if it syncs to their iPhones on the way to their accounting cubicles. Again, the main thing is that this needs to be really competitively priced.

I'd like to see a proper successor to the K-series, a premium enthusiast engine in other words. There's no indication that the Earth Dreams rollout will offer any of these, and the one engine I saw at Honda's stand at the NAIAS showed a focus on price and efficiency rather than high tech and high performance.

S600=Dream wrote:S'good and all, but this community has become the Temple of Wahhhhhh.

Seriously, it's impossible for Brand H to please people on this forum any more.

How hard is it to understand that the roots of this forum are of the enthusiast variety? Honda no longer panders to enthusiasts on virtually any level, so of course this forum will be in constant flux. Add to that the flooding of "pro-Honda" (employees, direct or indirect) trolls who think the enthusiasts really care if their livelihoods depend on moving bland Honda products, then you have a good formula for backlash.

Acura introduces a overdressed civic with an underdressed power train selection after years of saying they want to move up and take on Aston Martin, years of NSX replacement teases including a V-10, a "4-door sports coupe" that no one asked for and and apparently about the same number of people wanted, etc., and you really think people won't call Honda out if when they put up a lackluster effort after all of that. Take a look around the net. Plenty of people are laughing at the ILX. The remaining enthusiasts are still hoping against hope that Honda will throw them a bone.

How many people are bashing the RDX? Virtually no one, because people know a solid vehicle when they see one. It looks like the mini MDX is should have been out of the gate. My only complaint is that I would have liked to see it with a V6 AND SH-AWD.

It's the internet, so the whole "no one makes you come here" argument is a wide two-way street with plenty of exit ramps. Take it over to Acurazine if you don't want enthusiast backlash.

The reality is there's just not a lot of action in enthusiast cars. How many S2000s were being sold those last years? The CR variety? The dynamite TL SH-AWD 6MT gets no love either. I don't blame'em a bit. Enthusiasts are too fickle and rarely lay down the greenbacks when their bitchin' is done.

At the end of the day I reckon the enthusiast backlash is a needed thing to keep the execs on their toes--especially since they do apparently read and respond to this very website--however, and this is a HUGE however, I don't know what people expected out of this car, and I'm confused about the enormous backlash in this case in particular

I, frankly, expected the R18, a worse looking interior than the one presented, and the K24 as the top engine. That it's got an R20 instead, a nice interior, and great looking styling is actually quite a pleasant surprise. Otherwise, I'm not surprised by *anything* about the car, and I'm of the persuasion that they'll sell a bunch of the things, especially if they keep the cost under 30 grand like they said they would.

So it doesn't directly appeal to enthusiasts or go after BMW's throat...well...no surprise there. I don't think it was ever meant to!

As an aside--

I wonder if the enthusiasts around here haven't just outgrown Honda as a whole, regardless of what Honda is producing. Fact is, Honda has never made particularly fast cars, particularly powerful cars, or particularly exciting cars (S2K and NSX aside) EVER! I think people overinflate the brand/company as a whole. It's not like the Integra was a barn burning BMW competitor. Even the GSR was still just a Civic at the end of the day, and an overweight one, at that! It's not like the EK Civic Si was chasing that generation's Lancer Evolution or BMW M3. Hell, it hardly competed with most of it's price-relative competition--especially on paper (Think->Celica, Eclipse, 200SX/Silvia, Miata, Probe, don't even mention the Mustang, Camaro, etc.).

Fact is, Honda flat out isn't going to make totally different cars than it has been since, um, it was created (wow, big surprise there!), and I think people want them to. Especially the glassy eyed enthusiast community who for some reason tends to forget that the CRX (one of my favorite all time cars) took 10+ seconds to get to 60 miles an hour, was noisy, and rusted like every other Japanese shitbox from the early nineties. The beloved Prelude was just a FWD car with a boat anchor engine, terrible weight distribution, and roots from the Accord. For a loooooong time, that car was the flagship of Honda's performance cars.

If this forum was around at that point, Jesus, what a shitstorm that would have been.

Honda could just be full of foolish stubborn pride, but it could also just be resting on it's laurels because it's laurels were pretty good to begin with. That the enthusiast community expects more out of them is, frankly, sort of silly to me.

Again, I think most of you have just outgrown the company and should just go buy something that you'd want and not something Honda would make.

S600=Dream wrote:At the end of the day I reckon the enthusiast backlash is a needed thing to keep the execs on their toes--especially since they do apparently read and respond to this very website--however, and this is a HUGE however, I don't know what people expected out of this car, and I'm confused about the enormous backlash in this case in particular

I, frankly, expected the R18, a worse looking interior than the one presented, and the K24 as the top engine. That it's got an R20 instead, a nice interior, and great looking styling is actually quite a pleasant surprise. Otherwise, I'm not surprised by *anything* about the car, and I'm of the persuasion that they'll sell a bunch of the things, especially if they keep the cost under 30 grand like they said they would.

So it doesn't directly appeal to enthusiasts or go after BMW's throat...well...no surprise there. I don't think it was ever meant to!

As an aside--

I wonder if the enthusiasts around here haven't just outgrown Honda as a whole, regardless of what Honda is producing. Fact is, Honda has never made particularly fast cars, particularly powerful cars, or particularly exciting cars (S2K and NSX aside) EVER! I think people overinflate the brand/company as a whole. It's not like the Integra was a barn burning BMW competitor. Even the GSR was still just a Civic at the end of the day, and an overweight one, at that! It's not like the EK Civic Si was chasing that generation's Lancer Evolution or BMW M3. Hell, it hardly competed with most of it's price-relative competition--especially on paper (Think->Celica, Eclipse, 200SX/Silvia, Miata, Probe, don't even mention the Mustang, Camaro, etc.).

Fact is, Honda flat out isn't going to make totally different cars than it has been since, um, it was created (wow, big surprise there!), and I think people want them to. Especially the glassy eyed enthusiast community who for some reason tends to forget that the CRX (one of my favorite all time cars) took 10+ seconds to get to 60 miles an hour, was noisy, and rusted like every other Japanese shitbox from the early nineties. The beloved Prelude was just a FWD car with a boat anchor engine, terrible weight distribution, and roots from the Accord. For a loooooong time, that car was the flagship of Honda's performance cars.

If this forum was around at that point, Jesus, what a shitstorm that would have been.

Honda could just be full of foolish stubborn pride, but it could also just be resting on it's laurels because it's laurels were pretty good to begin with. That the enthusiast community expects more out of them is, frankly, sort of silly to me.

Again, I think most of you have just outgrown the company and should just go buy something that you'd want and not something Honda would make.

A.W.E.S.O.M. - O wrote:The reality is there's just not a lot of action in enthusiast cars. How many S2000s were being sold those last years? The CR variety? The dynamite TL SH-AWD 6MT gets no love either. I don't blame'em a bit. Enthusiasts are too fickle and rarely lay down the greenbacks when their bitchin' is done.

THIS CANNOT BE REAL LIFE... Just pretend the S2000 didn't sell multiple times Honda's expectation in it's early years and that they didn't let it rot for a decade. Powder blue paint and a chin spoiler was supposed to revive it? The actually dumbed the engine down and it still sold like hotcakes early on.

Then we'll pretend like they didn't virtually cut TL sales in half in general with that polarizing sheet metal and ridiculous grille. Why should the enthusiasts' first option be a $43,000 atrocity?

Then we'll act like they didn't release a "4-door sports coupe" that no one wanted.

Then pretend like any other "luxury" manufacturer has a line-up with no coupe/convertible option.

Are you going to deny that the S2000 was one of most well-received vehicles in Honda's history? Are you going to pretend that the Civic Si hasn't been critically and well-received in recent years?

I just wonder why all of these employees and dealers chose to try to flood and change the culture of this site instead of going elsewhere? I mean, it makes sense. This is where all of the passion for the brand was. Except back in those days, when the background of this site was black, people were discussing the Preludes, and Intergras, and NSXs, Civic Si's, Type Rs, etc.

A.W.E.S.O.M. - O wrote:The reality is there's just not a lot of action in enthusiast cars.

There's less action in the uncompetitive Honda hybrids looking at the sales numbers. Similarly, the silly looking ZDX, the Crosstour and RL all sell in such small quantities.

Honda easily sells more Si than possibly all those combined, a year.

The TL doesn't sell for a simple reason - its HUGE!!! The TL SH-AWD/6MT should be in a car the size of the TSX. The biggest issue with SH-AWD is that Honda never made the system small enough, and an engine less than a V6 to go with it... enthusiasts don't care so much for whales and SUVs so like the RDX, the TL/RL eliminated a large crowd by sheer size/shape/class.

The S2000 and the NSX both suffered the same fate - they far outlived their original lifespan... and never got their 2nd generation released after the usual five years. Leave a car in the market that long relatively unchanged, no wonder the sales died towards the end. Same can be said of the Element. All 3 models would have had a real shot of success if they had gotten development dollars... instead, HMC squandered all the money on stupid weak assed hybrids, hydrogen and stuff like the Crosstour/ZDX. They're bringing back the NSX now... but its going to be a weird sell, its a hybrid!

adrianchew wrote:The S2000 and the NSX both suffered the same fate - they far outlived their original lifespan... and never got their 2nd generation released after the usual five years.

I'm not sure of you've noticed, but the cars built on unique platforms seem to follow a much longer chassis lifespan in the Honda ecosystem? I would suggest that it was the intention all along to run those specialty cars on a 10+ year cycle. And while some here use that as an example of why sales dwindled towards the end, I don't think Honda does. Personally I think they accept the fate of these cars as part of their business plan, while they update other cars on the 5 year cycle.

The original NSX was in 1990, the S2000 in 2000, had the economy not forced them to change plans, the 2G NSX would have been out in 2010. IOW, every 10 years a specialty car is released because these are not core product. I agree that they enhance core product with (hopefully) trickle down tech and the halo effect, but their actual contribution to the bottom line is questionable.

Colin wrote:I'm not sure of you've noticed, but the cars built on unique platforms seem to follow a much longer chassis lifespan in the Honda ecosystem? I would suggest that it was the intention all along to run those specialty cars on a 10+ year cycle. And while some here use that as an example of why sales dwindled towards the end, I don't think Honda does. Personally I think they accept the fate of these cars as part of their business plan, while they update other cars on the 5 year cycle.

You can run a platform longer, but updates along the way to keep things fresh always helps. Look at the current Mustang, the engines and packages have constantly been changed, new technology has been added, so it continues to sell strong. Same deal with Corvettes. If you go higher up the chain, you see the variations in 911s, special edition Ferrari models, etc.

The Japanese don't seem to be nearly as good when it comes to doing long lived platforms. Honda has squandered nameplates even, which is very very very bad. The Camaro/Mustang still have a loyal following, without making iconic/recognizable nameplates in this segment, you never build that strong of a following. I think the Integra and Prelude nameplates were wasted off. The NSX is making a comeback, but its far too limited production/highly priced of a halo to be financially good for the books.

Nissan seems to be struggling with the Z-car, having lost a lot of the initial excitement when the 350Z launch, and this even has translated into Infiniti. They like Honda are too stagnant in the engine offerings, the VQ engine has been asked to be all kinds of things for Nissan.

Toyota, well, they lost the Celica, MR2 and Supra... the FT86 is more a Subaru than Toyota. Subaru with the WRX and Mitsubishi with the Evo have stayed true to the roots of those offerings, though some models have been somewhat controversial (just like the Si for Honda).

There's definitely a problem here... one thing the American brands have is the ability to build a solid following for certain models, and unless Honda stops changing names and not keeping up with a nameplate after the initial launch, they'll never quite build this sort of cult following of enthusiasts.

Just ask yourself, what's an ILX represent? Its just another 3-letter Acura model designation.

Colin wrote:I'm not sure of you've noticed, but the cars built on unique platforms seem to follow a much longer chassis lifespan in the Honda ecosystem? I would suggest that it was the intention all along to run those specialty cars on a 10+ year cycle. And while some here use that as an example of why sales dwindled towards the end, I don't think Honda does. Personally I think they accept the fate of these cars as part of their business plan, while they update other cars on the 5 year cycle.

You can run a platform longer, but updates along the way to keep things fresh always helps. Look at the current Mustang, the engines and packages have constantly been changed, new technology has been added, so it continues to sell strong. Same deal with Corvettes. If you go higher up the chain, you see the variations in 911s, special edition Ferrari models, etc.

All the cars you mentioned have legacies that go back 50+ years, so the nameplates have a lot of cache. I agree that if you keep changing them, you NEVER create these legacies, but as you noted, it doesn't seem to matter to the Japanese. Even though I sell them, it doesn't really matter that much to me either. For example, I don't care if you call it a Legend, 3.5 RL or RL, just make it a good car. I'll educate the customer what it is and what its legacy is. For example, I never had someone NOT buy an RL because it wasn't named Legend. They either bought or not on the relative value of the car vs. the competition.

I can't answer definitively since I'm not inside that loop, but regarding updates. What I was suggesting was that Honda "knows" that updates could help a long running platform. However, I bet that you never recoup the costs of the update so they don't bother with much of a change.

Take the S2000 for example. Let's say (all hypothetical now) that Honda planned for a 10 year cycle. Knowing they'd start at 15K a year and end at 1500 a year at the end of the run. They calculate how many sales they'll get with big 5 year update vs. a smaller 5 year one. The sales uptick isn't enough to justify making new dies to stamp new body panels so they decide on changing bumper covers only. Yes, this won't drive sales like a larger change might, but since this was accounted for at the project onset, it doesn't matter. So, not to put words into their mouths, they might not care that the S2000 'died on the vine' as so many like to say here. There would/should have been something out in 2010 and everybody would have forgotten about poor sales of the old car.

But this sort of highlights something I've said all along. Sports cars are not Honda's business (like Porsche). Their business is mainstream cars and sporty versions of these cars. I think things would have kept humming along had the SUV explosion not taken place.

Many of us fell in love with Honda because of coming into contact with some mainstream car. Be it a CRX, an Accord, an Integra, or a civic. At the end of the day, Honda knows that they're selling Gap Jeans, not Evisu special editions. From time to time, they throw us a bone SHOWING everyone that they can also make great, competitive products like the s2000 and the NSX but that is not part of their mission statement. Fine, I get it, and I can accept that.

However, when the ACURA brand was first started their motto was "precision crafted performance". If anything, Honda should really differentiate the two brands so that they offer different products to two different markets. I don't understand why both Honda and Acura are catering to the SAME MARKET, with SIMILAR PRODUCTS. A fully loaded accord comes with features and performance that can top a base I-4 TSX. WHY? It just makes zero sense to me why Honda doesn't utilize its performance know-hows in either of its brands. That's a waste of knowledge, and resources.

However, when the ACURA brand was first started their motto was "precision crafted performance". If anything, Honda should really differentiate the two brands so that they offer different products to two different markets. I don't understand why both Honda and Acura are catering to the SAME MARKET, with SIMILAR PRODUCTS. A fully loaded accord comes with features and performance that can top a base I-4 TSX. WHY? It just makes zero sense to me why Honda doesn't utilize its performance know-hows in either of its brands. That's a waste of knowledge, and resources.

Boy, I wish they'd go back to that original slogan! Get "Luxury" away from the description of the brand. However, I suppose some things are easier said than done.

As for overlapping product. It can be a difficulty at times, but (IMO) as long as they either buy the TSX or the Accord, HMC still wins. I think that most companies that have multiple tiered brands, have some overlap so I don't think we can single out H/A on that one. I guess they are reaching the limit of what they can do with the chassis they have in production. Hopefully when the TSX goes away, it gets replaced with 2+2 coupe, FWD with eSH-AWD. Maybe only the rear motors so they can have a manual with it. I wonder how that would feel? When you clutch to shift, the electric motor is still providing power to the wheels? Heck is that even doable?

First of all, the DC2 Integra GS-R was the class of the entry level sports coupes. It dominated comparison tests of the day, was among the lowest cost cars in its class, had top of class fuel economy, and was outaccelerated only by the turbo DSM twins. It had a better interior and reliability than its competition as well. To this day, the DC2 is far more popular in racing circles then _any_ of its competition. And in reference to BMW, the GS-R crushed the 318ti that BMW released in that era to ostensibly play in that entry level market. Yes, the BMW had RWD chassis dynamics, but the GS-R outstuck, outbraked and vastly outaccelerated the BMW. And we haven't even gotten into the DC2 Type-R - a car so iconic it deserves to mentioned in the same breath as the S2000 and NSX as Honda greats, and maybe even before them.

You mention the EK Civic Si, but fail to note that it had near GS-R level performance for less than $18k in 1999 (when the GS-R price has climbed to well over $20k from it's original $19.5k price in 1994). What the hell could you buy for $17.5k in 1999. A V6 Mustang or Camaro? 33% more weight with 25% more power, poor fuel economy, live rear axles and build quality far below the Si.

Oh, and BTW, my 1991 Civic Si did 0-60 in 8.5 seconds with a slipping clutch when it was totally stock. This should be surprising since a modern Honda Fit is about as quick but weighs 400 lbs more with only 10 additional hp (and even the first gen Si did it just over 9 seconds according to C&D). And chassis-wise? Mmm, mmm good.

The point here is that performance is all relative. Relative to the competition, Honda has been slipping back. The DC2 Integras produced 142 hp and 170 hp stock and weighed 2500-2667 lbs. The new ILX, exlcluding hybrid, produces 150 and 200 hp and will easily break 3000 lbs IMO. That will put the R20 ILX below the performance level of a 20 year old DC2 LS and the K24 version will be about on par with the original GS-R. Sure, ratings systems have changed, torque curve matters, but after 20 years, shouldn't Acura have moved the game on just a bit more? Honda and Acura vehicles used to be easy sales, no brainer choices, guaranteed to satisfy. You knew that if you chose Honda or Acura, you were getting a combination of features, efficiency, power, handling, technology and reliability that was simply not possible at any price from the other OEMs. Do you still feel that today?

SC

S600=Dream wrote:I wonder if the enthusiasts around here haven't just outgrown Honda as a whole, regardless of what Honda is producing. Fact is, Honda has never made particularly fast cars, particularly powerful cars, or particularly exciting cars (S2K and NSX aside) EVER! I think people overinflate the brand/company as a whole. It's not like the Integra was a barn burning BMW competitor. Even the GSR was still just a Civic at the end of the day, and an overweight one, at that! It's not like the EK Civic Si was chasing that generation's Lancer Evolution or BMW M3. Hell, it hardly competed with most of it's price-relative competition--especially on paper (Think->Celica, Eclipse, 200SX/Silvia, Miata, Probe, don't even mention the Mustang, Camaro, etc.).

Fact is, Honda flat out isn't going to make totally different cars than it has been since, um, it was created (wow, big surprise there!), and I think people want them to. Especially the glassy eyed enthusiast community who for some reason tends to forget that the CRX (one of my favorite all time cars) took 10+ seconds to get to 60 miles an hour, was noisy, and rusted like every other Japanese shitbox from the early nineties. The beloved Prelude was just a FWD car with a boat anchor engine, terrible weight distribution, and roots from the Accord. For a loooooong time, that car was the flagship of Honda's performance cars.

However, when the ACURA brand was first started their motto was "precision crafted performance". If anything, Honda should really differentiate the two brands so that they offer different products to two different markets. I don't understand why both Honda and Acura are catering to the SAME MARKET, with SIMILAR PRODUCTS. A fully loaded accord comes with features and performance that can top a base I-4 TSX. WHY? It just makes zero sense to me why Honda doesn't utilize its performance know-hows in either of its brands. That's a waste of knowledge, and resources.

Boy, I wish they'd go back to that original slogan! Get "Luxury" away from the description of the brand. However, I suppose some things are easier said than done.

As for overlapping product. It can be a difficulty at times, but (IMO) as long as they either buy the TSX or the Accord, HMC still wins. I think that most companies that have multiple tiered brands, have some overlap so I don't think we can single out H/A on that one. I guess they are reaching the limit of what they can do with the chassis they have in production. Hopefully when the TSX goes away, it gets replaced with 2+2 coupe, FWD with eSH-AWD. Maybe only the rear motors so they can have a manual with it. I wonder how that would feel? When you clutch to shift, the electric motor is still providing power to the wheels? Heck is that even doable?

I agree, as long as the customer walks out with the TSX or the Accord AHM wins. However, let's consider a market where there's buyer A, and buyer B (which seems to be the case on this forum lol).

Buyer A would be very happy with Accord. TSX ends up being too performance oriented, decides to stick with Accord. Buyer B not interested in Accord at all, see's TSX, gets TSX. AHM wins 2 out of 2.

I know I sometimes sound inconsistent, but when it comes to the sedan game there HAS to be some kinda CORE differentiation between the two. With the ZDX examples I've used in the past, the company is venturing out and capturing market share that would've otherwise not been tapped. Whereas I feel with the current sedan strategy, the models overlap so freaking nice between Honda and Acura that I honestly don't feel like there's a point in owning an Acura as opposed to a Honda. True, Honda's not the only one doing this, but I sometimes wonder why Honda's the only one getting called out. No one (not as many) complains about Lexus and Toyota overlapping, Audi and VW overlap, or Infiniti and Nissan overlap (ok SOME between the Maxima and the G35, but Infiniti made the Coupe) why is it that Honda can't differentiate enough between the two brands?

Chevy and Cadillac, Ford and Lincoln, you just don't hear the complaints as much, because one brand is a significant upgrade from the other. BMW and Mini would never overlap. MB and Smart.. well that's just not even worth talking about.

I currently have a GD3 Fit. I love the thing, and hope to be buried in it. I think it's classic old school Honda greatness.

I also own a '90 Miata.

I'm die freaking hard loyal to those early 90's cars, and I flat out 100% agree with your assessment of things circa Integra GSR/ITR era relative to competition. I think those cars are the bees knees, and I sort of wish Honda would have just kept making them the same way until today.

Hell, the EK's reputation, for example, has been bolstered over the years for a lot of reasons. But mostly for Honda reasons--it handles great, it's quick (not fast), it's not terribly expensive to own, and it's got a lot of potential.

Cars made by Honda today are REALLY REALLY REALLY similar in that way, right? I mean, you guys proved that with the project Si of 8th gen vintage.

I think that's what I was trying to get at.

.....

It just seems to me that people WANT Honda to make something to compete with every car maker on freaking earth, when they should know by now that they won't.

I am almost definitely grossly rewriting things, I admit, and I apologize. I just think that it's unfair to blantantly expect Honda to reanalyze it's total business model of making great driving cheap cars to compete with BMW, which is what a LOT of the enthusiast market--including TOVers--hope Honda to do. Especially when we should all know that will never happen. Is that disappointing? Maybe so, but it shouldn't be so shocking to people.

I admit, I'm of the persuasion that Soichiro would probably spit on the ground at the current lineup, but what are you going to do? I mean, what they do works, and it makes money, and Honda does eventually throw a bone to the enthusiasts. They're stodgy, and that's a fact. It pisses people off, but it's more or less a fact of Honda's existence.

I'm over it, I'm used to it, and though I haven't absolutely embraced it, I can accept it because the cars they make now are damn fine vehicles as a whole. They aren't the class leading no brainers they once were, but they're hardly total losers either.

I think, in a way, a number of cars they make still appeal to a lot of Honda's core values and *should* appeal to their enthusiasts, but they don't because they aren't keeping up with the competition.

Did I say that enough ways?

Also, FWIW Shawn, I've been following you and this forum for years, and I do love it and respect all you guys like crazy.

First of all, the DC2 Integra GS-R was the class of the entry level sports coupes. It dominated comparison tests of the day, was among the lowest cost cars in its class, had top of class fuel economy, and was outaccelerated only by the turbo DSM twins. It had a better interior and reliability than its competition as well. To this day, the DC2 is far more popular in racing circles then _any_ of its competition. And in reference to BMW, the GS-R crushed the 318ti that BMW released in that era to ostensibly play in that entry level market. Yes, the BMW had RWD chassis dynamics, but the GS-R outstuck, outbraked and vastly outaccelerated the BMW. And we haven't even gotten into the DC2 Type-R - a car so iconic it deserves to mentioned in the same breath as the S2000 and NSX as Honda greats, and maybe even before them.

You mention the EK Civic Si, but fail to note that it had near GS-R level performance for less than $18k in 1999 (when the GS-R price has climbed to well over $20k from it's original $19.5k price in 1994). What the hell could you buy for $17.5k in 1999. A V6 Mustang or Camaro? 33% more weight with 25% more power, poor fuel economy, live rear axles and build quality far below the Si.

Oh, and BTW, my 1991 Civic Si did 0-60 in 8.5 seconds with a slipping clutch when it was totally stock. This should be surprising since a modern Honda Fit is about as quick but weighs 400 lbs more with only 10 additional hp (and even the first gen Si did it just over 9 seconds according to C&D). And chassis-wise? Mmm, mmm good.

The point here is that performance is all relative. Relative to the competition, Honda has been slipping back. The DC2 Integras produced 142 hp and 170 hp stock and weighed 2500-2667 lbs. The new ILX, exlcluding hybrid, produces 150 and 200 hp and will easily break 3000 lbs IMO. That will put the R20 ILX below the performance level of a 20 year old DC2 LS and the K24 version will be about on par with the original GS-R. Sure, ratings systems have changed, torque curve matters, but after 20 years, shouldn't Acura have moved the game on just a bit more? Honda and Acura vehicles used to be easy sales, no brainer choices, guaranteed to satisfy. You knew that if you chose Honda or Acura, you were getting a combination of features, efficiency, power, handling, technology and reliability that was simply not possible at any price from the other OEMs. Do you still feel that today?

SC

S600=Dream wrote:I wonder if the enthusiasts around here haven't just outgrown Honda as a whole, regardless of what Honda is producing. Fact is, Honda has never made particularly fast cars, particularly powerful cars, or particularly exciting cars (S2K and NSX aside) EVER! I think people overinflate the brand/company as a whole. It's not like the Integra was a barn burning BMW competitor. Even the GSR was still just a Civic at the end of the day, and an overweight one, at that! It's not like the EK Civic Si was chasing that generation's Lancer Evolution or BMW M3. Hell, it hardly competed with most of it's price-relative competition--especially on paper (Think->Celica, Eclipse, 200SX/Silvia, Miata, Probe, don't even mention the Mustang, Camaro, etc.).

Fact is, Honda flat out isn't going to make totally different cars than it has been since, um, it was created (wow, big surprise there!), and I think people want them to. Especially the glassy eyed enthusiast community who for some reason tends to forget that the CRX (one of my favorite all time cars) took 10+ seconds to get to 60 miles an hour, was noisy, and rusted like every other Japanese shitbox from the early nineties. The beloved Prelude was just a FWD car with a boat anchor engine, terrible weight distribution, and roots from the Accord. For a loooooong time, that car was the flagship of Honda's performance cars.

I agree with notyper. This isn't so much about enthusiasts wanting 900hp RWD V16 engines in their Hondas, it's that their core mainstream products are not the class standouts they used to be. A Civic and Accord used to be a no-brainer, but the same really can't be said today because there are a lot of compelling choices out there, and even subjectively there's very little to differentiate anymore.

I agree with notyper. This isn't so much about enthusiasts wanting 900hp RWD V16 engines in their Hondas, it's that their core mainstream products are not the class standouts they used to be. A Civic and Accord used to be a no-brainer, but the same really can't be said today because there are a lot of compelling choices out there, and even subjectively there's very little to differentiate anymore.

Point taken.

Still, is that Honda's fault, or is it a kudos to everyone for finally catching up?

The "maybe the enthusiast has grown out of Honda" thing just does not hold water.

I was 36 when I owned my 2010 Si, which had a screaming redline, nice interior, slick shifter, and on and on. I was 36 when I looked at a 2012 Si, and the redline was gone, the interior was a step back and the shifter was still there.

I own a DC2 Integra and travel often for work. So I drive lots of the newest... as well as owning other Hondas and having an extended family of all Honda/Acura products. When I get back in my '95, and it feels so much more controlled, easy, and joyful compared to current Hondas/Acuras and other makers products... well, thats when you realize Honda/Acura has kept to its excellence in design and manufacturing, but not in creating excellent driving cars. Integras were the exciting daily drivers of their time, not just fanboy runabouts. Now, they want you to wait and ante up 100k for a NSX, or be told just take a hybrid and like it. Wonder why we 'whine'? I'm currently looking outside the Honda/Acura family, but will keep and continue to restore my DC2. It's that good, S600! I wish you had had the opportunity to live with one, instead of what Honda offers you currently.

Incidentally, it wasn't slow sales (people growing out of and leaving) that eliminated the Integra. It was a smaller, poorer redesign(RSX), and the 'post-HondaNAm scandal' mass hiring outside the company from places like Ford that reshaped the mission. They left us, by getting American car co. execs that only knew Mercurys, etc...and chose to build what they know. Hence the subsequent rise of Torrance, and the push for American design. In case you hadn't noticed, NAm Honda has become very 'old Detroit' in its operation style.

Colin wrote:...However, I bet that you never recoup the costs of the update so they don't bother with much of a change.

Yet, they made a FWD form of the Crosstour, with a different front bottom spoiler. Go figure! This is truly a speculative misinformation comment if I've ever heard it.

MMC alterations and updates, even to bodywork keep production rates higher and lower the cost of each unit produced. That means, its more profitable/more able to recover its costs, which are small particularly in the soft panels.

And don't say sports cars arent their business. They're building an NSX. Sporty cars, like Prelude, Integra, CRX Si, etc... were how they made their fortune and reputation that they enjoy so fully now. These WERE sporty versions of mainstream cars. And demand has remained strong if you look at the used car market for each. In case you'd forgotten, none of these are SUVs.

Colin wrote:...However, I bet that you never recoup the costs of the update so they don't bother with much of a change.

Yet, they made a FWD form of the Crosstour, with a different front bottom spoiler. Go figure! This is truly a speculative misinformation comment if I've ever heard it.

MMC alterations and updates, even to bodywork keep production rates higher and lower the cost of each unit produced. That means, its more profitable/more able to recover its costs, which are small particularly in the soft panels.

And don't say sports cars arent their business. They're building an NSX. Sporty cars, like Prelude, Integra, CRX Si, etc... were how they made their fortune and reputation that they enjoy so fully now. These WERE sporty versions of mainstream cars. And demand has remained strong if you look at the used car market for each. In case you'd forgotten, none of these are SUVs.

But this sort of highlights something I've said all along. Sports cars are not Honda's business (like Porsche). Their business is mainstream cars and sporty versions of these cars. I think things would have kept humming along had the SUV explosion not taken place.

So not counting the original S600/800 which weren't really sold in the US, Honda has made exactly two sports cars. The rest are sporty cars off their mainstream cars. Wait, I already said that.

I'll agree that Preludes, Si's and CRXs helped with their reputation, they hardly made a fortune with them. If they did, they wouldn't have been replaced with SUVs.

integrator wrote:It's that good, S600! I wish you had had the opportunity to live with one, instead of what Honda offers you currently.

Incidentally, it wasn't slow sales (people growing out of and leaving) that eliminated the Integra. It was a smaller, poorer redesign(RSX), and the 'post-HondaNAm scandal' mass hiring outside the company from places like Ford that reshaped the mission. They left us, by getting American car co. execs that only knew Mercurys, etc...and chose to build what they know. Hence the subsequent rise of Torrance, and the push for American design. In case you hadn't noticed, NAm Honda has become very 'old Detroit' in its operation style.

Like I said homey, I *did* live with a car from that era. It was a delight! I miss it, I really do!

Also, the RSX gave the Integra it's papers on a track, on the road, and in the engine department. I'd hardly call it a "poor" redesign. It lost the wishbones out front, yes, but it gained a whooooole bunch of other positives.

I own a 2007 Fit right now. I've it had since mid 2006, put almost 80,000 miles on it, and I love it just as much...actually, even more. It's at least as good as that Civic, and it's actually better for me because of it's cargo capacity.

I've driven the CR-Z, as well. It's slow, yup. No surprise there! Still, it's better to drive than most of what I've been in in the past few years, though. It's got a *great* chassis, a *great* interior, and a *great* gearbox. I also happen to adore the way it looks. It's not a flat out enthusiasts car, but it's definitely a Honda in that it's entertaining, well built, and technologically advanced without hitting you over the head to tell you it's all those things. It's also definitely a Honda in that it's not exactly a tire shredder, but it's got enormous potential as a package, which HPD has proven at the 25 hours of Thunderhill, and Honda itself has also hinted at with the SEMA show cars.

Also, the Accord gets overlooked over and over again despite it being stonking quick with a V6, great driving with a four banger, and luxurious yet not that expensive in most of it's trims. The coupe is one of the best looking cars Honda has ever made, if you ask me. Sure it's bigger than it used to be, but it's still a dynamite car.

The SUV's I could personally live without, but they do make the company a lot of money!

The only Accord that is stonking quick is the 6MT coupe. And that`s the only Accord that is arguably more fun to drive than a Fit MT.

Part of the troubles these days are down to all the passive safety stuff. We might pine for the cars of the early 90s but they were far lighter and more suited to small engine high revving low torque Hondaness.

James May of Top Gear reckons early 90s cars were the best ever - they`d got all the reliability stuff sorted with fuel injection etc, handled and stopped well. Before they got encumbered with all the safety stuff and had to be built like tanks. Most common complaint of customers is poor visibility, without any question. Then you have to get all defensive and justify it on grounds of - `quote you are going to be in an accident madam and this car is going to keep you alive unquote. Not literally of course but that`s the way it has become. Not that we should or could wish to go back to the relatively flimsy cars of the past. And to be fair Honda is not alone - many other brands have their own `I can`t see out of this` cars and some of the current generation Hondas are better than 5 years ago. Its also worth keeping in mind that Hondas are proven to be the safest cars in their class....I know....boring....

Put a K20 in the Fit and in the CRZ and we would all of us shut up and stop complaining. There.....sorted.

First of all, the DC2 Integra GS-R was the class of the entry level sports coupes. It dominated comparison tests of the day, was among the lowest cost cars in its class, had top of class fuel economy, and was outaccelerated only by the turbo DSM twins. It had a better interior and reliability than its competition as well. To this day, the DC2 is far more popular in racing circles then _any_ of its competition. And in reference to BMW, the GS-R crushed the 318ti that BMW released in that era to ostensibly play in that entry level market. Yes, the BMW had RWD chassis dynamics, but the GS-R outstuck, outbraked and vastly outaccelerated the BMW. And we haven't even gotten into the DC2 Type-R - a car so iconic it deserves to mentioned in the same breath as the S2000 and NSX as Honda greats, and maybe even before them.

You mention the EK Civic Si, but fail to note that it had near GS-R level performance for less than $18k in 1999 (when the GS-R price has climbed to well over $20k from it's original $19.5k price in 1994). What the hell could you buy for $17.5k in 1999. A V6 Mustang or Camaro? 33% more weight with 25% more power, poor fuel economy, live rear axles and build quality far below the Si.

Oh, and BTW, my 1991 Civic Si did 0-60 in 8.5 seconds with a slipping clutch when it was totally stock. This should be surprising since a modern Honda Fit is about as quick but weighs 400 lbs more with only 10 additional hp (and even the first gen Si did it just over 9 seconds according to C&D). And chassis-wise? Mmm, mmm good.

The point here is that performance is all relative. Relative to the competition, Honda has been slipping back. The DC2 Integras produced 142 hp and 170 hp stock and weighed 2500-2667 lbs. The new ILX, exlcluding hybrid, produces 150 and 200 hp and will easily break 3000 lbs IMO. That will put the R20 ILX below the performance level of a 20 year old DC2 LS and the K24 version will be about on par with the original GS-R. Sure, ratings systems have changed, torque curve matters, but after 20 years, shouldn't Acura have moved the game on just a bit more? Honda and Acura vehicles used to be easy sales, no brainer choices, guaranteed to satisfy. You knew that if you chose Honda or Acura, you were getting a combination of features, efficiency, power, handling, technology and reliability that was simply not possible at any price from the other OEMs. Do you still feel that today?

SC

S600=Dream wrote:I wonder if the enthusiasts around here haven't just outgrown Honda as a whole, regardless of what Honda is producing. Fact is, Honda has never made particularly fast cars, particularly powerful cars, or particularly exciting cars (S2K and NSX aside) EVER! I think people overinflate the brand/company as a whole. It's not like the Integra was a barn burning BMW competitor. Even the GSR was still just a Civic at the end of the day, and an overweight one, at that! It's not like the EK Civic Si was chasing that generation's Lancer Evolution or BMW M3. Hell, it hardly competed with most of it's price-relative competition--especially on paper (Think->Celica, Eclipse, 200SX/Silvia, Miata, Probe, don't even mention the Mustang, Camaro, etc.).

Fact is, Honda flat out isn't going to make totally different cars than it has been since, um, it was created (wow, big surprise there!), and I think people want them to. Especially the glassy eyed enthusiast community who for some reason tends to forget that the CRX (one of my favorite all time cars) took 10+ seconds to get to 60 miles an hour, was noisy, and rusted like every other Japanese shitbox from the early nineties. The beloved Prelude was just a FWD car with a boat anchor engine, terrible weight distribution, and roots from the Accord. For a loooooong time, that car was the flagship of Honda's performance cars.

I agree with notyper. This isn't so much about enthusiasts wanting 900hp RWD V16 engines in their Hondas, it's that their core mainstream products are not the class standouts they used to be. A Civic and Accord used to be a no-brainer, but the same really can't be said today because there are a lot of compelling choices out there, and even subjectively there's very little to differentiate anymore.

I have to agree with him also. There is an awful lot of gray area between a 1,000HP V16 powered RWD Civic and what they have now. For me, I certainly wouldn't mind an uptick in performance. I am not necessarily looking for the FASTEST car in the segment, but I do expect Honda to maintain their engineering prowess.

At least for me, it is less about the stagnation of performance and more about the stagnation of Honda's way. While they are cheapening out and pulling technology at an alarming rate, everyone else is moving in the opposite direction. It does seem to be a very classical Detroit sort of style, in that they are cutting, cutting, cutting while everyone else is marching forward. Only Detroit cronyism would think that less is more in the face of increased competition, and we all know where that got them in the 70's and 80's. When we used to own a lot of domestic cars (even after our first Honda), the whole family made the concious decision to not be burned like we were with them, no matter what company it was. The unfortunate reality is that with each new Honda released, we are closer to leaving. They don't do everything badly, but they are just retreating on their core competencies. Examples, they are cheapening suspension, engines and drivetrains. They are pulling quality out of every touchable surface in the cars, and then they are adding in a few electronic doo dads, and saying AHHHH look at the amazing features you get. GM used to hide crap cars by adding little electronic, flavor of the month, doodads too. It couldn't hide the crap car below for long.

The Si is a slain poster child because not only is the ONLY "sporty" Honda left in the lineup, but it is cheaper and has less technology in the area that defines the Si, the engine bay. People can rationalize all they want, but the reality is that Honda could have provided a large uptick in performance, kept the character AND the price with little effort. The old Honda would have. The new Honda is more concerned with saving $100 on an engine, getting the absolute top level of emmissions performance and saving $100 on the interior. As such, they are starting to look a lot like GM with their refusal to invest and improve engine tech, spend money on a good quality interior, and actually move the bar forward rather than doggedly assuming that they know what we want/need, better than we do. It is going to bite them.

RE: Detroit cronyism and new model releases.Look at all the latest additions to the Honda NAm upper management- even those on the videos. Mendel is surrounding himself with a comfortable buffer of Detroit hires. Yes-men (and women) doing Detroit-style business. I don't think this is the Honda way. Honda used to promote its engineers to the top ranks.

And good for Ito for calling them out as lazy. My guess, this is why the rush to intro ILX and RDX both this spring - that usually happens when theres an ultimatum from the top and necks are on the chopping block. Mendel knows he has to get some wins (he's had a staggering amount of NAm-only failures), in the event the new Accord's intro doesn't meet expectations. Remember, the new ILX was 'promoted' to early release right after the poor Accord Coupe Concept reception, and before the Chicago AutoShow. It makes me wonder if the ILX was the only clear hit of the 3 (Accord Coupe, ILX, RDX) at the NAAS. We'll see if Ito follows through since Civic sales have been better...ie: wiggle room. Ito needs to place some Honda execs from Japan in to keep Mendel from raiding the entire business. The tsunami, earthquake, flood were bad, but there are no more veils for Mendel to hide behind. He better start pushing the discounts to keep those Civics moving. The Crosstour?... do any salespeople here think the 4cyl Hail Mary will help? But my guess is the decision point on him will come with the release of the new Accords in fall.